BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 141
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
141 (Bonilla) - As Amended April 7, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy | |Vote:| |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes
Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY:
This bill requires a school district, county office of education
or charter school that hires a beginning teacher, commencing
with hiring for the 2016-17 school year, to provide that teacher
with a program of beginning teacher induction, unless the
teacher meets existing requirements that exempt them from
induction participation. Further prohibits the local education
AB 141
Page 2
agency (LEA) from charging a fee to the teacher to participate
in the induction program.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Proposition 98/GF state mandated costs, potentially in the tens
of millions, for LEAs to provide induction to beginning
teachers. Currently, there are 165 induction programs that serve
approximately 18,000 teachers. A recent survey of 126 programs
showed 11.5% of program participants were charged fees ranging
from $390 to $3,350. On average, these fees total $5 million
statewide. Actual costs will depend on the size and types of
claims districts submit to the Commission on State Mandates.
LEAs may file cost claims even if they are currently fully
funding induction for beginning teachers.
The requirements of this bill also place pressure on the state
to provide a new dedicated funding source for induction
programs. In prior years, the state dedicated funding for
induction that ranged from $87 million to $128 million.
COMMENTS:
Purpose. According to the author, some LEAs are requiring
teachers to pay for their participation in induction programs,
placing heavy financial burdens on teachers just starting their
careers. Additionally, some school districts are covering the
full cost of induction, creating an unequal playing field for
teachers who have identical experiences, education, and
credentials. This bill would require LEAs, commencing with
hiring for the 2016-17 school year, to provide beginning
teachers with an induction program. Additionally, this bill
prohibits a local education agency (LEA) from charging a fee to
AB 141
Page 3
a beginning teacher to participate in an induction program.
Background. The state established an induction program in 1992
known as the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA)
program. In 2004, as part of the process to clear a multiple
and single subject credential, the Legislature required teacher
candidates to complete an induction program, if available. If an
induction program is verified as unavailable by the employer,
the teacher can clear their credential without participation in
an induction program.
Funding history. The state provided annual funding for the BTSA
program through 2009. At the height of funding (2007), the
state provided $128.6 million for the program, which allowed for
a per-participating teacher allocation of approximately $4,000.
Local education agencies provided an additional $2,000
per-participating teacher, usually through an in-kind match.
In 2009, in response to the state budget crisis, the Legislature
reduced funding for this program and approximately 40 other
categorical programs. Along with the funding reduction, the
state made program requirements flexible, allowing LEAs to spend
funding for any educational purpose. This flexibility was
continued under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) enacted
in 2013. Not every district received funding for BTSA prior to
LCFF; however, for those that did receive BTSA funding, the
funds were rolled into the base of their LCFF based upon 2012-13
funding allocations.
Opposition. The California School Boards Association oppose
this bill. They note small and rural LEAs often share the cost
of programs and may not be able to continue offering these local
programs without charging a fee. This could result in teachers
traveling longer distances to attend more expensive programs,
such as those offered by the California State University system.
Analysis Prepared
by: Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
AB 141
Page 4